The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has detailed an alleged multi-state conspiracy behind the NEET-UG 2026 paper leak, claiming that National Testing Agency (NTA)-appointed subject experts secretly copied and memorised examination questions before sharing them with a wider network.

According to the agency's over 94-page chargesheet, the leak was not a last-minute breach but a carefully orchestrated operation involving insiders entrusted with translating and reviewing confidential examination papers. The investigation also points to serious security lapses inside the NTA headquarters that allegedly enabled the breach.

Experts Allegedly Misused Official Access

The CBI has named three NTA-appointed subject experts in the chargesheet—Botany expert Manisha Gurunath Mandhare, Chemistry expert Prahlad Vithalrao Kulkarni and Physics expert Manisha Sanjay Havaldar.

Investigators allege that the trio exploited their official responsibilities during the translation and verification of NEET-UG question papers to gain unauthorized access to confidential content before the examination.

The agency claims the experts later reproduced the questions through memory or handwritten notes and allegedly shared the material in exchange for illegal financial benefits.

Questions Memorised and Written on Chits

The investigation describes different methods allegedly used by the accused to extract examination content without attracting suspicion.

According to the CBI, Chemistry expert Kulkarni prepared brief handwritten chits containing references to nearly all the questions while working in the confidential section of the NTA office. For easier questions, investigators claim he memorised them and later wrote them down after returning to his hotel.

Similarly, Physics expert Havaldar allegedly noted important portions of the paper in brief before reconstructing the questions outside the secure premises.

Botany expert Mandhare is accused of relying entirely on memory. Investigators claim that because of her extensive academic experience, she was able to recall the questions and later identify and mark the corresponding passages in NCERT textbooks after leaving the NTA office.

The agency alleges that these reconstructed questions eventually formed the foundation of the larger paper leak network.

Security Lapses at NTA Headquarters

The chargesheet also highlights multiple security shortcomings inside the NTA headquarters in Delhi's Okhla area.

One of the major concerns raised by investigators is the absence of continuous CCTV surveillance inside the confidential section where examination papers were handled. While cameras existed, footage was reportedly retained for only 20 to 25 days.

Since the confidential work concluded in early April and the case was registered in May, investigators said the relevant footage had already been overwritten before the probe began.

The CBI further stated that there was no dedicated control room to monitor CCTV feeds in real time, allowing activities inside the confidential section to go unnoticed.

No Frisking of Subject Experts

Investigators also flagged the absence of physical security checks for experts entering or exiting the confidential section.

According to the chargesheet, no frisking or inspection was conducted despite the highly sensitive nature of the work. The agency believes this created opportunities for confidential material to be taken outside the secure area.

Although all experts had signed confidentiality declarations, the CBI alleges they violated those commitments by retaining, reproducing and circulating confidential examination content before the NEET-UG 2026 examination.

Probe Continues

The paper leak controversy led to widespread protests by students across the country and renewed scrutiny of the National Testing Agency's examination processes.

The CBI investigation is continuing to identify the complete network of individuals involved in the alleged conspiracy. Authorities are also examining the role of intermediaries and beneficiaries who may have received the leaked examination material before the test.

The case has intensified calls for stronger examination security measures, tighter monitoring of confidential operations and greater accountability within agencies responsible for conducting national-level entrance examinations.